PHM-Exch> PRESS RELEASE The Business of malnutrition: setting trading rules

[Claudio Schuftan]

From: Patti Rundall <prundall at babymilkaction.org>


 Do share.

Related to this is this article in today's Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2011/nov/23/corporate-giants-target-developing-countries?INTCMP=SRCH

for online version with links also to a PDF version see: *
http://info.babymilkaction.org/pressrelease/pressrelease24nov110*
*
*
*PRESS RELEASE*

*The Business of malnutrition: setting trading rules*

Codex Nutrition Meeting, Bad Soden, Frankfurt, Germany
12 -18th November 2011


A dozen developing countries and health campaigners attending the Nutrition
Meeting of Codex, the UN body that sets international food standards,
1achieved partial success in their call for strict controls on the
marketing
to be included in Guidelines 2 on a loose range of processed fortified
products for babies that were never clearly defined. The objective was to
provide nutrients which are* “either lacking or are present in insufficient
quantities,” *with the clear aim of targeting all those 'at risk' of
malnutrition.

The countries, *Brazil, Nigeria, Chile, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Gambia, Togo,
Cameroon, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, South Africa* and *Bolivia*, fearing that
uncontrolled marketing of the new products would undermine
breastfeeding,3increase family poverty and create dependence on
products that are
expensive and often unnecessary, called for several key World Health
Assembly Resolutions to be mentioned in the set of Guidelines being
discussed.4  The *United States *and the *European Union* initially
insisted that it was unnecessary to mention the Resolutions, arguing that
they stand on their own in their own right. *Australia* and
*Botswana*suggested that paragraphs from the relevant WHA texts could
be referenced
and, after the World Health Organisation (WHO) stepped in, the EU and US
agreed to a compromise.5

Experts from the *International Baby Food Action Network* (IBFAN) suggest
that as the EU and US economic crisis continues, the new ‘business of
malnutrition’ - which has the potential for multi-billion dollar profits
from exports to the developing world and is portrayed as a win-win solution
for the economy and development – could lead to a marketing bonanza that,
instead of improving infant and young child health, could harm it and drain
family budgets.6

The debate centered on a proposal by *Ghana* to update existing Codex
Guidelines for a range of fortified complementary foods. Ghana, the
majority of African and Latin American countries, IBFAN, the International
Association of Consumer Food Organisations (*IACFO*) and the International
Lactation Consultant Association (*ILCA*) were all anxious to protect
breastfeeding, local family foods and skills and to improve the safety and
quality of these foods.7  However, their task was made especially tricky
because of the extensive food industry presence  – the norm for Codex
meetings. 40% of the 268 delegates were food industry, with 59 attending as
members of Business Interest NGOs (BINGOS) and 49 included on government
delegations – some even heading these delegations. For example, the *Mexican
* delegation, which made many industry-friendly interventions, was 100%
industry, with US baby food companies *Mead Johnson *and *Abbott *alongside
*Kelloggs *and* Coca Cola*.* Germany* hosted the meeting and 12 of its 15
delegates were industry, including baby food giants, *Milupa* (*Danone*)
and *Nestlé*, alongside *Coca Cola*, *Kraft* and others.8

The health advocates acknowledged that the fortification of basic foods can
be an important health intervention if properly managed, but had serious
concerns about this untested market-led approach in relation to infant and
young child feeding. **

 *Joyce Chanetsa**,* *IBFAN*’s Regional Coordinator for Africa and Chair of
the *African Codex Experts Group*:*“We accept that these products may
provide important nutrients when used in certain situations, but if they
are promoted as quick fix magic bullets on the market that will end
malnutrition, parents will do anything to buy them, however unaffordable
and unnecessary they may be.  Once market-led programs overtake other
humanitarian and development interventions, the underlying and root causes
of poverty and malnutrition are forgotten.  If ‘malnutrition in all its
forms is to be a sustainable business, demand needs to be maintained. Is
this the vision for Africa that the poor remain impoverished and needy?”*

In response to the *US* and *EU* opposition to references to the
Resolutions, WHO clarified that it was indeed appropriate to cite the
resolutions: *“While the WHA Resolutions are not legally binding under the
constitution – it doesn’t mean that the Resolutions are just paper and
devoid of effect. [They] constitute the international practice and a
consensus language that is also used in other international fora, for
instance they are used customarily in WTO litigations.” *

The EU and US eventually gave way, agreeing to allow a reference to the
2001 WHO *Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding *(WHA 54.2)
but refusing the newer Resolutions. Several other sections of the
guidelines relating to food safety and quality were improved, but
invariably, as is usual in Codex, exporting country views carried more
weight than those on the receiving end. With meeting time fast running out
the Codex requirement to reach consensus was not followed on important
questions of marketing, such as whether the products could share the same
brand name as formulas, whether they should carry a statement recommending
continued breastfeeding and whether they could be advertised.

However, on the key issue of claims, a proposal by the *Global Alliance for
Improved Nutrition* (GAIN)9 to allow promotional claims was not taken up.
GAIN is a public private partnership, that works with over 600 companies,
including *Danone* (the second largest baby food company), *PepsiCo, Mars*and
* Kraft*, and which promotes market-led approaches to *‘prevent
malnutrition.’* The US initially supported the GAIN proposal, but softened
its approach and suggested that Codex needed to explore how products could
make a statement about their intended purpose without ‘simply being viewed
as a claim.’  IBFAN and IACFO picked up on this point, highlighting the
risks of promotional claims, especially when products share brand names
with breastmilk substitutes and stating that there are many other ways to
present nutrition information that make the intended purpose and
appropriate use clear.  GAIN argued that because all sorts of inappropriate
claims are made on other foods (many in contravention of Codex guidelines
and WHA Resolutions 10)  these new foods need claims to be commercially
competitive. Overlooked is the fact that GAIN’s approach would undermine
the efforts of those governments trying to protect child health by banning
inappropriate marketing and promotional claims.

Labels should stress the importance of sustained breastfeeding after 6
months, that industrial by-products such as de-fatted cotton-seed flour
(used as animal feeds or fertilizer) should not be used in baby foods.

Because so much agenda time was spent on discussion about other nutrition
issues, such as the level of scientific evidence needed nutrient reference
values and labelling,  there was no time to address the New Zealand
proposal for a review of the Follow-on Milk standard or the India Proposal
for cereal-based foods for underweight children. In their comments, IBFAN
and IACFO highlighted the harm caused by the marketing of milks for older
babies, which are not necessary and should be the same composition as
infant formula. 11

For more information contact: Patti Rundall, Baby Milk Action/IBFAN/IACFO +44
7786 523493 prundall at babymilkaction.org,  Elisabeth Sterken: National
Director, INFACT Canada  esterken at infactcanada.ca
_________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20111124/daab1430/attachment.html>